Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angel Light (novel)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Angel Light (novel)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find any reliable sources for this. Schuym1 (talk) 22:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Me neither. It's listed under the fiction section of Andrew Greeley's page, and that seems to be the most appropriate. Jeremiah (talk) 00:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per the 5 pillars Testmasterflex (talk) 03:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but expand as this is a work by a very notable author, Andrew Greeley. Plenty of Ghits which establish the novel exists. 23skidoo (talk) 16:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The author is notable, but not the book. It doesn't matter if it exists. It matters if it's notable. Schuym1 (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: this book fails the notable book criteria:
 * it has not been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself; in fact, I haven't been able to find any sources to establish its notability.
 * it has not won a major literary award.
 * it has not been made or adapted with attribution into a motion picture that was released into multiple commercial theaters, or was aired on a nationally televised network or cable station in any country.
 * it is not the subject of instruction at multiple grade schools, high schools, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.
 * its author is not so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is him/herself notable by Wikipedia's standards, rather that the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of work would be a common study subject in literature classes.

I checked Netlibrary and a few other reputable literary databases and could find nothing related to this novel. María ( habla con migo ) 16:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Captain-tucker's provided sources are adequate in proving notability. María ( habla con migo ) 17:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - 2 minutes work and I have added three - come on guys they might not be the best references in the work but 2 minutes gave me these. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  17:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say that fanfasticfiction.org constitutes a reliable reference. The NYT article is nothing more than a brief plot summary, but it's not listed under "References", so I won't harp on that.  I'm not sure that a link to Greeley's official website counts as an independent source, especially when the page linked is just a list of his works...?  All these added "sources" prove is that the novel exists, not that it is notable. María ( habla  con migo ) 17:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Here are several more non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the book itself, this book passes WP:BK, it certainly could use expansion but it should not be deleted:
 * Beauregard, Sue Ellen. "Upfront advance reviews: Adult fiction." Booklist 92, no. 6 (November 15, 1995): 515., Abstract: Reviews the book `Angel Light: An Old-Fashioned Love Story,' by Andrew M. Greeley.
 * Steinberg, Sybil S. "Forecasts: Fiction." Publishers Weekly 242, no. 46 (November 13, 1995): 50., Abstract: Reviews the book `Angel Light,' by Andrew M. Greeley.
 * --Captain-tucker (talk) 17:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.